Rugby Union Law Changes

Discussion in 'Sports, Adventure Training and Events' started by Thebull140, Mar 10, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I was reading the paper this morning and saw that the IRB is proposing some rule changes that will severely change the game.

    These include:

    * Defending players will be allowed to collapse a rolling maul, hitherto virtually impossible by legal means. Truck and trailer would no longer be an offence.

    * If the ball is passed back into a team's 22-metre area, kicks directly into touch will result in a line-out from where the ball was kicked.

    * Touch judges will be charged with specifically policing offside in the threequarters. They will attract the referee's attention to an offence by raising their flag in the direction of the errant team.

    * Quick line-out throw-ins need no longer be straight. The ball can be thrown backwards, like a pass.

    * The technical infringement of "numbers in a line-out" will be abolished. There will be no limitations on the numbers either side can put into this phase.

    * Corner posts will be abolished. Disallowing a try because a player touched the flag before touching down is seen as a disincentive to the desire for more tries.

    Also the proposal would allow players to play the ball on the ground in the breakdown and remove the awarding of penelaties for all but 2 offences, offside and foul play.

    To me some of these make sense, but some are complete rubbish. Ok passing back into the 22 to kick for touch gets on my tits but allowing a team to put as many numbers as they want in the line out, thats just stupid and will lose teams an advantage they can gain by having outstanding jumpers like chris jack. Reducing the number of penelty offences is just bowing to the souther hemisphere teams complaining that they were getting beat by a certain northern hemisphere team with a good kicker. What about stopping the Kiwis from running as they're better at that? And i just dont get the corner post one. I mean if the corner flag is in position that if a player in touches it he is in touch. Is this saying the player is allowed to step into touch to score a try?

    Full report here
  2. oldbaldy

    oldbaldy LE Moderator Good Egg (charities)
    1. Battlefield Tours

    From the IRB:

    Rugby Law Reform Project underway

    18 FEBRUARY 2006

    An IRB Laws Project Group, formed by the organisation's Rugby Committee to undertake a critical review of the tackle, ruck and maul Laws, has concluded a week of evaluation into new versions of Laws in these areas. Utilising the laws laboratory facilities at Stellenbosch University in South Africa the Group formulated a series of experimental law variations (ELVs) that will undergo further trials over the coming months.

    Led by Council member Bill Nolan the Group included former World Cup winning Wallaby coach Rod Macqueen, former Springbok coach Ian MacIntosh, former Scottish coach Richie Dixon, former French player, coach and IRB Regional Development Manager Pierre Villepreux, IRB Referee Manager Paddy O'Brien and IRB Development Manager Bruce Cook.

    “The fundamental reason for the study is that the IRB has proactively recognised that these areas of Law are proving to be the most difficult to interpret in a practical manner. The Game is continuing to evolve following a decade of professionalism and the IRB is being honest and transparent in undertaking an evaluation of the Laws and the current position of the game on the world stage,” said Bill Nolan.

    Looking at the game in a new light

    “We are looking at the game in a new light with the idea of making it simpler and easier to play and referee, and to ensure Rugby is understood and enjoyed by the increasing number of spectators that are being attracted to the game. In the past, we have tinkered with existing Laws but in Stellenbosch we started out with a blank canvas, looked at new Law variations and studied the cause and effect of the changes.”

    “As a world governing body we are committed to reducing the number and complexity of the Laws and to reduce the “cannot’s” in law and promote the “can’s” to create a positive philosophy. However, everything that is being done must, and will, relate to the Playing Charter that has been endorsed by our Member Unions, that recognises Rugby as being a game for all shapes and sizes,” added Nolan.

    Some of the Laws trialled during the week and which will continue to be evaluated during competitions at Stellenbosch are:

    • Allowing the ball to be played with the hand at the breakdown
    • Only foul play (Law 10) and offside resulting in penalty kicks - all other offences resulting in free kicks.
    • Free kicks are taken by a tap kick or a scrum option only.
    • Teams no longer have to match up numbers in the lineout.
    • Bringing the maul to ground by the defending team

    An ongoing programme

    Rod Macqueen stated, “This project, the resulting recommendation of ELVs, and their continued evaluation, is an ongoing programme, still very much in its embryonic stage. One that will be monitored continuously by the Laws Project Group (LPG) via a clearly defined process of evaluation through demonstrable practical experiments and not hypothetical outcomes.”

    “Other Law changes already being trialled around the world include the use of 12 replacements, Under-19 scrum laws at senior level and in-goal touch judges. These will also eventually be included in the process.”

    “The ultimate aim of these experimental laws is to allow for more creativity by the players and this week there were encouraging signs such as clarity of decision-making, less confusion among players at the breakdown and reduced law subjectivity,” added Macqueen.
  3. We've been trialling some of these in our matches in the college leagues. They make the game quite weird, as mauls are a lot less effective. Some make little difference though, like the not matching mumbers in the line out. It just means that when the opposition have a shortened line, you still put your guys in so they can sprint out and nail the fly half.
  4. It just seems to me the IRB is trying to take the game away from the pack. As a forward it's not good. Yes open running rugby is good to watch but when your playing on a saturday afternoon in the rain on a pitch on the side of a hill in lancashire its very very different. There is a difference between northern and southern hemisphere rugby and these rule changes seem to be more suited towards the big 3 and will drive a bigger divide into the up and coming northern hemisphere teams that the bigger countries have invested in to widen the interest in the game.
  5. oldbaldy

    oldbaldy LE Moderator Good Egg (charities)
    1. Battlefield Tours

    Tell you what: Do away with the wing forwards and cut numbers to 13. Have scrums instead on lineouts, do away with ruck & mauls & make the player tackled play the ball but only allow a team to do it five times before they must give the ball to the opposition & allow the ball to be fed into the feet of the second row in a scrummage.

    What do you mean there's already a game like that? 8O
  6. You forgot to mention to give all players a lobotomy and to close the stadiums because nobody wants to watch you anymore
  7. Defending teams will be allowed to collapse a rolling maul

    Hmm lets see southern hemisphere teams can't stop the english and french rolling mauls so they propose a highly dangerous rule change that is totally unsuited to grass roots northern hemispere rugby.

    Sounds like a load of tosh to me
  8. Dont forget the italians, and the georgians, and the russians, and the romanians, and the portugese and every other northern hemisphere team who are building themselves up using a playing style that suits the weather and pitches they have. Just because the southern hemisphere doesnt give a fcuk about their upcoming teams why should they be allowed to crap on the ones up here. These changes will put these guys back 10 years.
  9. Speaking as a back I think a lot of these changes are shite. If it puts the ball in the three qaurters more, I'll be knackered inside 20 minutes!
  10. was speaking to an army player in the gym about this mentioned the maul collapsing rule his response:

    fcuk that
  11. pathetic, it will end up as league with any more of this.
  12. ******* hell, maul collapsing

    As a prop, its a big enough nightmare when some cnut collapes it and every other ****** comes down on top of you, but at least you get penalties for it. Doing it for a laugh is a bit silly.

    All this will do is reduce the amount of younger grass roots player (me!!) who want to play prop and other forward positions, which are desperately undersubscribed as it is.

    From reading those rules, it seem that they just make most of the current infringements legal......

    Bit silly really

  13. Being able to collapse a rolling maul without penalty? Fcuk that with a big stick.

    How many fatalities/spinal injuries would it take to get that rule repealed?

    I agree with the senitiments that most of the changes just legitimate what Southern Hemisphere sides have been doing (and sh1tty Southern Hemisphere refs have been allowing) for donkey's years.
  14. I agree with the change on numbers in the lineout as the emphasis is on the defending team to pay attention, and also once you enter the lineout then you cannot leave so if you make the mistake advantage to the attacking team. Also if you are worried about the opposition backs and leave yr lineout lite then the other team can establish driving maul.

    Unless the stupid idea of collapsing a mual legally is introduced. This sounds like madness, lets encourage lads of 14-15 yrs old to put themselves at the bottom of a maul to bring down the ball carrier!!! umm sensible.

    Playing the ball on the gnd with hands, bad idea again it would become a free for all in a ruck situation. Does the player have to be on his feet when he plays the ball with his hands because unless they are really flexible it would put most players shoulders below there hips which has been a safety concern for yrs. Did they not htink this through!!!

    I do agree with reducing the number of penalty offences but not just to foul play and offside though. This would mean that the likes of playing ball in offside position ie player picks up ball when it has gone forward from his own player then free kick and other slightly innocuous penalty plays. However if this happens then it would affect the way a referee plays advantage as a team would not have the advantage from regaining the ball at a lineout.
  15. My understanding are that these are being looked at and there will be no changes, with the exception of leagues trialling them, until after the world cup.